ShareThis Page

Experts: Terrorists turn their hatred toward media as way to spread fear

| Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2015, 11:55 p.m.

More reporters have been killed on the job during the past three years than at any time since the Committee to Protect Journalists started tracking the deaths in 1992, according to the nonprofit's records.

The attack Wednesday on a French satire magazine in Paris was the worst incident involving journalists since 2009, when gunmen killed 30 reporters and two media workers in the Philippines.

“These are very difficult times for journalists, and it's a lot harder to assess risk factors,” said Andy Alexander, a visiting professor at Ohio University's journalism school who serves on the Committee to Protect Journalists. “The digital age has changed everything.”

The incident — like the beheadings of American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, who were kidnapped in Syria last year — seems to represent a new phenomenon, media experts said. Terror groups are targeting journalists in public and brazen ways to send a message.

It's an unprecedented attack on intellectual freedom, said Jerry Ceppos, dean of the Manship School of Mass Communication at Louisiana State University.

“We used to worry about journalists in war zones who faced the possibility of becoming collateral damage, unintended victims of combat,” Ceppos said. “But journalists today have become deliberate, intentional targets, whether they are beheaded while a video camera is running or are the victims of rifle-bearing zealots.”

At least 61 journalists were killed because of their work in 2014, including 17 in Syria's civil war, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, based in New York.

That was down from more than 70 confirmed deaths each of the previous two years, the nonprofit says. In all, 1,106 journalists have been killed since 1992, and Iraq has been the deadliest place.

Not all deaths occur in war zones. Brazilian blogger and lawyer Marcos de Barros Leopoldo Guerra died in his home Dec. 23 when someone fired bullets through his kitchen window. He had recently posted a story questioning local officials' use of public money.

Five reporters have been murdered in the United States since 1992. Most recently, Chauncey Bailey, the editor-in-chief of the Oakland Post in Oakland, Calif., was killed on his way to work in 2007 because of his coverage of a Muslim bakery.

“We've really seen an increase all over the world in physical attacks, assassinations, killings of journalists,” said Bruce Shapiro, executive director of the Dart Center for Journalism & Trauma at Columbia University in New York. “This is a global trend.”

Because terrorists, drug dealers, corrupt politicians and others can send their own messages over the Internet and via social media, they no longer rely on reporters to tell their stories, Shapiro said. Instead, they use journalists to raise ransom money or spread terror, he said.

Even in the face of threats and intimidation, reporters must continue to tell important stories and reveal injustice, said Justin Merriman, a Tribune-Review photojournalist who has worked amid conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“You have to tell the stories that need to be told, and you can't let fear or intimidation stop you from doing that,” he said. “Otherwise, these situations that are awful and despicable will continue to get worse, and there won't be any change to make things better.”

Journalists who place themselves in harm's way deserve respect, said Nicholas Lemann, dean emeritus at Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism in New York.

“Journalists who are not in danger should have a lot of respect for journalists who are in danger,” Lehman said, “and not try to pretend we're all in danger to the same extent.”

Andrew Conte is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7835 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me